Congratulations to the other winners: Barbara Brown, John Hamilton, TILT Design, Why Not Associates, Micha Weidmann Studio and Mat Maitland.

A few months ago Zerofee entered Just Add Stock, an Eye Magazine competition judged by key figures in the design industry – Aporva Baxi, Pam Bowman, Deyan Sudjic and Tom Hind, Director of Photography at Getty Images. On this occasion the jurors sought work which successfully and innovatively used stock imagery combined with high-calibre design values.

This prestigious design publication has always been of great importance to us and continues to hold its own in an increasingly competitive and difficult marketplace. Normally, time (or principles) wouldn’t allow us to entertain entering awards schemes but, since a large percentage of our work, by necessity, features stock imagery, we felt Just Add Stock was an important award to participate in.

Not ones to normally blow our own trumpet, on this occasion we feel the outcome certainly warrants mention, as the panel awarded us outright winners in the Reports and Brochures category for our design donation work on a broadsheet publication to support the Angola 3 campaign. We’re also excited to see Zerofee and this project featured on the Eye Blog as an extension of the magazine coverage.

As with all the work that’s undertaken by Zerofee, we’re choosy about who we work with and their overall background story – their social/environmental footprint. Once a project is accepted, donated or commercial, we put all efforts into creating the best solution, and in this case, that effort culminated in a powerful, printed outcome – we’re thrilled to have it recognised by key industry figures.

The project was created for Bondage for Freedom, a campaign collective brought together by Sam Roddick and Jamie Catto. We’ve previously posted on the subject of the campaign and the design solution so, if you’d like to learn a bit more about the Angola 3 and the design decisions that we implemented, take a look here.

Thorny Issues. Photo: Simeon Eichmann

June 28th, 2009. Another Sunday, another sermon. Only this one was somewhat different to the Catholic mantra that resided in my childhood each Sunday morning. This was given by a woman (which in itself would have caused a stir) but not in a church and not by a priest. We were present at Alice Rawsthorn’s sermon on What is Good Design? held as part of the School of Life’s event series.

The setting, Conway Hall, owned by South Place Ethical Society, made perfect sense considering the topic addressed, and the wood, light and space of the Main Hall took me back to formative years and the notion of the speaker being omnipotent.

The 45 minutes ahead held much promise. Not only because a well-respected design critic was giving a sermon on this important and relevant topic, but I hoped that the message would create a stir and everyone present would leave with much to ponder.

Paper pamphlets describing the order of service greeted the congregation – a warning of the ‘hymns’ to be sung either side of the sermon ahead. With Tainted Love (Soft Cell version) pumping through hidden speakers, a chap in tailcoat attempted, with much vigour, to rouse us from our Sunday morning slumber and into morning song.

Hymns aside, clear and precise not only in her delivery, but also her sharp dress sense in electric blue, Rawsthorn made for a formidable figure in her technical pulpit on stage, but lack of visual materials diluted her messages – apparently a Mac to PC incompatability issue that could have been easily avoided. With professional verve though, Rawsthorn was able to command her audience and inject some good humour into the situation.

Rawsthorn certainly left an impression, making some effective points – unusually, how the Apple iPhone and its ‘apps’ might reduce the need for numerous gadgets, for instance. Her Design for the Other 90% message was a powerful one, demonstrating how design overlooks the majority of the world’s population. Reference to the well-intentioned One Laptop Per Child project was also worth its mention, but Rawsthorn only alluded to the problems the project incurred – spiraling costs, internal bust-ups and negative local reactions. A limited, test deployment of new electric FedEx vans was also highly lauded, but focused on aesthetics and only briefly explored from an environmental perspective. Don’t we still have to plug these things into a coal/nuclear fueled grid? Aren’t they likely to be shipping many designed items of superficial value around in the first place? Perhaps they’re amazing (and no doubt preferable to a diesel alternative), but I would have liked more detail, beyond the cosmetic, to support the reverence.

Service design was addressed, deservedly, and the presence of design thinking in the development of important, social systems is undeniably vital to their successful delivery. Perhaps the example of an exercise that ‘discovered’ that quality of life for the elderly is enhanced by assistance with things they physically struggle to do, in addition to a varied circle of friends was not the most convincing for those of us with a limited understanding of the work in this field. This example, perhaps an innovative exercise lacking illumination here, ran the risk of sounding evangelical about the obvious – exactly the kind of thing that attracts anti-design sentiments from those of a cynical disposition.

Omitting any measure of the iPhone’s environmental impact and the design/advertising/marketing supported 18–24 month life-cycle seemed short-sighted, alongside her interpretation of iPhone app details – should have been 1 billion ‘downloaded’, not ‘sold’ for instance (a pedantic, but important difference when considering the real impact and usefulness of the software concerned) – and the notion that Apple responded to ‘illegal’ app development with its App Store and associated SDK; a nice story, but improbable with the initial absence of such features perhaps better explained by a race to market and a desire for control and standards.

I can appreciate that Rawsthorn may have felt it necessary to introduce her audience to the positive work that was and is being attempted, but there was a sense she was only skimming the surface and some references weren’t fully explored, or accurate, for that matter.

So, despite the antiquated, beautiful environment, religious pastiche in structure of sermon and Rawsthorn’s erudite presentational style, I came away disappointed and with the distinct impression that I’d been privy to a wasted opportunity. Why wasted? Alice Rawsthorn is a high-profile design writer/critic and, as such, holds a lot of influence in professional design circles as well as in the development of future design talent.

In this mock-religious atmosphere she had sung the praises of an area of design which has, in recent times, experienced a much needed upsurge of interest. Inexplicably though, she made little, if any, mention of designers’ complicity in working for brands and supporting the output of unnecessary goods and thus, perhaps inadvertently – often blindly – assisting a culture of material gain and profit before people. While designers – ostensibly those in the more traditional communications sectors – continue to apply their influence in a commercial culture of consumption and corporate deceit, design will always hold a guilty place in a history of social and environmental failures. Rawsthorn quotes, ‘design like you give a damn’. Sometimes, perhaps, it’s better to not design, if you give a damn.

Being in such a strong position and historically well connected within the design community, I’d hoped that her sermon would enlighten more and incite her followers to speak in new tongues. Instead, they mumbled through The Clash’s ‘I Fought the Law’, had no public opportunity to ask questions and were treated to what seemed to be premium, irony-free, English tea and biscuits, before leaving to enjoy a beautiful, sunny London Sunday. Irrespective of the shortcomings I perceived, I’m delighted she’s onboard and perhaps, for those outside the industry, spearheading a ‘Good Design’ philosophy to become a key voice in helping shape our design future.

If you have a real interest in typography, you’ll have heard of Alan Kitching, the renowned letterpress designer. Alan’s work has been featured in numerous design publications, commissioned by top advertising agencies and has helped to keep interest in the craft alive. You may not have heard of Celia Stothart but, alongside Alan, her passion for design, typography and letterpress is equally evident.

Alan and Celia gave a talk back in March at the London College of Communication (LCC), as part of their ‘Changing Face of Letterpress’ events and exhibition. A while back now but, for those of us that missed it, Alex Cooper and Rose Gridneff (who run the letterpress workshop and teach at the LCC, as well as operating their own practise/studio, The Experimental Letterpress Workshop) have made the talk available as a video podcast. The imagery above is screen-grabbed from the podcast, just to give you a flavour.

The talk is highly recommended and delivers insights into Alan’s early career, facilities, his and Celia’s love of letterpress and a year-long effort to recover an enormous cache of unloved woodtype from a barn in Somerset. For anyone who’s only experience of typography has been digital, seeing how woodtype’s printed appearance can be inadvertently ‘filtered’ by woodworm – resulting in an tactile, distressed look usually just simulated onscreen – should be required viewing.

You can download the Alan Kitching and Celia Stothart lecture as a video podcast from iTunes. Clicking the link (should) open iTunes and take you to the correct page.

You can follow the LCC and Rose Gridneff on Twitter at @lcclondon and @rosegridneff respectively